Every time there's a multiple shooting of white people, such as happened in Omaha this week, the radio and the internet comes alive with people claiming that the solution to the problem is more guns. Via John Cole, I give you the ever-predictable, and quite unhinged Instapundit.

It seems to me that we've reached the point at which a facility that bans firearms, making its patrons unable to defend themselves, should be subject to lawsuit for its failure to protect them. The pattern of mass shootings in "gun free" zones is well-established at this point, and I don't see why places that take the affirmative step of forcing their law-abiding patrons to go unarmed should get off scot-free.

Is Reynolds really suggesting that it would be a good idea for everyone in the mall during the height of Christmas season to be packing? Seriously? There would be mass shootings over the last Tickle-me-Elmo on the shelf. Parents would be drawing down on each other and on hapless store clerks (who, hopefully, would be armed as well) over the last copy of Godzilla Unleashed for Nintendo Wii. And don't even get me started about what would happen at the Apple Store. Terrifying.

And of course, installing metal detectors and TSA-style security at the mall entrances wouldn't be any better. I'm reminded of something Chris Rock said in "No Sex in the Champagne Room."

Don't go to a club with metal detectors. Sure you feel safe inside, but what about all those people waiting outside with guns? They know you don't have one.

Going to the mall is scary enough without adding in the potential of massive gunfights over sale items. Fewer guns, not more, seems to me to be the best possible option here.

And it might be nice if this came up for discussion more often than on those comparatively rare occasions when it impacts the white community.